視覺藝術學習者創作藝術表徵因素之個案研究

A Case Study of the Representative Factors Regarding Visual Arts Learner's Art Creations

李堅萍(Zen-Pin Lee)；朱素貞(Su-Chen Chu)；李學然(Shyue-Ran Li)

藝術創作 ； 表徵因素 ； 視覺敘事 ； art creation ； representative factors ； visual narrative

藝術教育研究

24期（2012 / 12 / 01）

47 - 69

繁體中文

視覺藝術學習者創作時會毫不考量其他因素地表徵其藝術理念嗎？本研究以一視覺藝術學生為對象，探索其創作之表徵因素的類別、模式與時程。經視覺敘事研究法探索5次創作歷程後發現：（1）影響視覺藝術學習者進行藝術創作的表徵因素有：主題解讀與創意、創作表現之實施、媒材技法的權衡、落差評估之修正等4個類別。（2）主題解讀與創意一直反覆導引創作發展，創作表現之實施與媒材技法的權衡則是一決定便一往直前，影響模式頗不同。（3）耗用時程依序為：創作表現之實施、主題解讀與創意、媒材技法的權衡、落差評估之修正。基於研究發現，本研究建議教師不宜僅聚焦於創作技術的訓練，而應平衡或權衡創作的4項表徵因素，實施相應教學措施。

How do visual arts learners create art? The purpose of this study is to explore the category, the model, and the time interval of representative factors regarding visual arts learners' art creation. The study used the qualitative research method of ”visual narrative” and explored five different types of a subject's artistic creative process. The conclusions are: (1) The four categories of representative factors regarding visual art learners' art creation are the interpretation and creativities of subject, the creation implementation, the decisions of material and techniques, and the revisions of shortage evaluations. (2) The models of these factors are different. The interpretation and creativities of subject have always repeatedly guided the development of creation. The creation implementation and the decisions of material and techniques only affected the creator's decisions once. (3) According to the time interval, representative factors in order are: the creation implementation, the interpretation and creativities of subject, the decisions of material and techniques, and the revisions of shortage evaluations. This study suggests, visual arts teachers should balance and adjust these four representative factors rather than focus on training learners' art skills.

1. Alward, P.(2012).Transparent representation: Photography and the art of casting.The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism,70(1),9-18.
2. Amabile, T. M.(1996).Creativity in context.Boulder, CO:Westview Press.
3. Bruner, J. S.(1966).Toward a theory of instruction.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University.
4. Denzin, N.(Ed.),Lincoln, Y.(Ed.)(2000).Handbook of qualitative research.Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
5. Diket, R. M.(2001).A factor analytic model of eighth-grade art learning: Secondary analysis of NAEP arts data.Studies in Art Education,43(1),5-17.
6. Dufour-Janvier, B.,Bednarz, N.,Belanger, M.(1987).Pedagogical considerations concerning the problem of representation.Problems of representation in teaching and learning of mathematics,Hillsdale, NJ:
7. Duval, R.(2000).Basic issues for research in mathematics education.Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (PME 24th),Hiroshima, Japan:
8. Fergus-Jean, E.(2002).CA,Pacifica Graduate Institute.
9. Fitts, D. D(1962).Non-equilibrium thermodynamics: A phenomenological theory of irreversible processes in fluid systems.New York, NY:McGraw-Hill.
10. Fountain, H. L. R.(2007).IN,Purdue University.
11. Gagne, E. D.,Yekovich, C. W.(1998).The cognitive psychology of school learning.New York, NY:Harper Collins Colledge Publisher.
12. Gregory, D.(2002).FL,The Florida State University.
13. Hager, M. A.,Winkler, M. K.(2012).Motivational and demographic factors for performing arts attendance across place and form.Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,41(3),474.
14. Johnson, G. C.(2002).Using visual narrative and poststructuralism to (re)read a student teacher's professional practice.Teaching and Teacher Education,18,387-404.
15. Lesh, R.(1979).Mathematical learning disabilities: Considerations for identification, iagnosis, and remediation.Applied mathematical problem solving,Columbus, OH:
16. Lozano Chiarlones, E.(2004).Spain,Universidad Politecnica de Valencia.
17. Messick, S.(1976).Personality consistencies in cognition and creativity.Individuality in Learning,San Francisco, CA:
18. Milbourne, K. E.(2003).IA,The University of Iowa.
19. Moorefield-Lang, H.(2008).Chapel Hill, CA,The University of North Carolina.
20. Othman, J.,Treagust, D. F.,Chandrasegaran, A. L.(2008).An investigation into the relationship between students' conceptions of the particulate nature of matter and their understanding of chemical bonding.International Journal of Science Education,30(11),1531-1550.
21. Parker, J. S.(2008).MN,Walden University.
22. Parkes-Ratanshi, R.,Bufumbo, L.,Nyanzi-Wakholi, B.,Levin, J.,Grosskurth, H.,Lalloo, D. G.,Kamali, A.(2010).Barriers to starting ART and how they can be overcome: Individual and operational factors associated with early and late start of treatment.Tropical Medicine and International Health,15(11),1347-1356.
23. Pearson, C. R.,Micek, M. A.,Pfeiffer, J.,Montoya, P.,Matediane, E.,Jonasse, T.(2009).One year after ART initiation: Psychosocial factors associated with stigma among HIV-positive Mozambicans.AIDS and Behavior,13(6),1189-96.
24. Salehi, S.(2008).Canada,Queen's University.
25. Stricker, D. R.(2008).MN,University of Minnesota.
26. Tidmore, S. A.(2003).IN,Indiana University.
27. Ver, J. M.(2004).CA,Fielding Graduate Institute.
28. Wang, S.(2005).PA,The Pennsylvania State University.
29. 李堅萍(2004)。行政院客家委員會獎助學術研究計畫行政院客家委員會獎助學術研究計畫,行政院客家委員會=Xingzhengyuan Hakka weiyuanhui。

1. 鄧宗聖(2015)。臺灣學院藝師在創作指導上教學實踐之歷程分析：從藝術本位觀點立論。課程與教學，18(3)，95-124。
2. 呂琪昌(2016)。從實務導向研究的角度探討視覺藝術類創作論文的撰寫。藝術教育研究，31，111-145。
3. (2018)。藝術創作歷程創造力指標建構之研究：後設認知的觀點。國際藝術教育學刊，16(1)，148-223。